Random Blog of Choice!

I was just wondering...

Why is it that we in Canada are not allowed to say "Merry Christmas" anymore?! It's always "Happy Holidays". Sure, I get it! It's because we are MULTICULTURAL..but..what does that have to do with Christmas and expressing how adoring we are of the holiday?! I have nothing against others and what they celebrate but please! I will not give up saying Merry Christmas! I will not say Happy Holidays! Christmas is what i celebrate!

Not to mention, some people want to change our national anthem. Ok yet again, I understand the whole MULTICULTURAL thing, I really really do! But, I was confused learning the national anthem as it is, let alone if it is changed!! Can't we do other things to show we are multicultural other than making it practically illegal to say Merry Christmas and changing our national anthem?!

The next time a person in a store says "Happy Holidays!" i'm going to say "and a Merry Christmas to you!" ..It's just the way it is!

=]

rant over.

Is This Photo Fact or Fiction !?

What does the saying "It's a Kodak moment!" mean to you? Is a frozen memory meant to be tampered with? Now a days, pictures have taken a new meaning. They can be changed any way possible--may it be the colour, brightness, saturation, exposure, scene effects, fun effects, highlighting, and the list continues! Sometimes, it can be fun to play around with images and see what you can do with them. Despite the fact photo manipulation can be interesting, is it acceptable to play with an image that is meant to be viewed by the public? A simple change in a photo could totally alter a person's perception of that image. It could be a tiny false alteration that could be a major mistake.

Shortly after OJ Simpson was arrested for murder, both the above magazines were out for sale. One of which is a photo manipulation. The Time magazine had their photo of OJ manipulated. They were accused of making it look "darker" and more "menacing" than the original mug shot. When confronted, James Gaines, the managing editor explained it was to "remove dust marks and enhance the photo". It is obvious that "removing dust marks and enhancing the photo" changed the emotion and message of the manipulated photo compared to the original. People have different opinions of what those emotions and messages are but it STILL changes the photo no matter what way you look at it. It is then that people ask WHY? Why was there a need to change this image? To attract reader's to Time magazine compared to Newsweek? Or maybe to make OJ appear worse than he already did. Either way it seems unethical to show the public a false image.

Of course Photoshop, a well known graphic editing program, has become popular when it comes to magazines and other forms of media related images. They can simply do anything with it by the click of a button. Gap in your teeth? That can be fixed. Crooked nose? No problem! It can all be fixed to make you look as close to perfect as possible. Is this really what we want to teach people? You have to change yourself because perfection is key? Why are celbrities appearances changed to be on the front of a magazine? Are they not fine the way they are?

I guess the woman above had too many flaws. Her hair must not have been blond enough and her chest must not have stood out as much as it could! Well, how must the REAL woman on this magazine feel? Knowing she wasn't good enough as she is to be on the magazine, they had to fix her! I know I'd feel a little upset and the self confidence level would probably plummet.

We all have to remember that we cannot possibly believe all the images we see, as convincing as some may be. Photo manipulation can be fun to play around with but it is best to inform the public when this has happened. Photo manipulation can be a dangerous thing to mess around with!

How nice ARE strangers in Toronto?!

(This was my sad attempt to rhyme every caption btw.)

It is a busy day in Toronto as many people hustle and bustle to cross the street.
As I look around, I notice there are lots of interesting people to meet.

On our way to the Eaton centre, we devise a plan.
It is to see how many pictures we can take with strangers wheather it's a woman or man.

Our first victim is this guy, his name we do not know! We stop for directions and ask him where to go. Thia lady is the second person and she's nice, infact, we take a picture with her twice.

Lots of people let us take their picture, but some do not, we take one woman's picture cause it's pretty funny, but I think we got caught!All in all, this concludes a pretty fun day, talking to random people in Toronto on the 21st of May.

I find that... the media trip was an excellant adventurous time and definetly not a waste of life space for future media classes! The day could have in fact been a little nicer (weather wise that is) but it was still fun. I did extremely enjoy going to MuchMusic, i felt kind of uneasy knowing i was on TV though, especially after being rained on, but it was still pretty cool. Everything at MuchMusic seemed so rushed and important because it was 'live'. There seemed to be many job oppurtunities that one may not know of by just watching the show on TV. There are plenty of jobs that are behind the camera that are probably JUST as important, if not more important than the hosts jobs. Personally, I think that any of those jobs would be a blast. The special guest, to me, was not that special, I wasn's impressed with N.E.R.D's interview. Honestly, it was pretty boring, I could have fallen asleep right there on TV. Luckily I didn't. (Their song was harsh too, I don't think half the audience ever heard of it) but that's just my opinion!! The day was very fun though, i highly recommend it for alllll other media classes! (I hope for them to get a more entertaining special guest though)

=)

Privacy going Public! --Stalkerazzi.

Is it so facinating to see others going to the store, walking the dog, and other simple everyday things? The paparazzi or "stalkarazzi" as some may call them constanly follow around celebrities 24/7 and have no sympathy for what terrible and horrifying shots they may get of them. It may seem to some that being famous would be amazing but would it REALLY be amazing to be constantly followed around and being caught on camera doing things you do not want shown to the public?? Is it right for these camera-men to be everywhere the celebrities go without giving them a rest?


Media invading people's privacy is an ongoing issue. Camera crews are hired to follow around a certain celebrity. Their goal? To get the most embarassing/interesting photo of them as possible. Could a celebrity being intruded cause them to perhaps go a little crazy? For example: Brittney Spears. She is a perfect example of what the media could possibly be doing to a person. Causing them to act out in unexplainable ways. Because of Britney, a new law has been brought up called the "Britney Law" as some think of it as or the "Personal Safety Bubble". (camera-men cannot come any closer than 60 feet away) Discuss weather or not the law should be passed.

Check more about it here:
http://www.newsmax.com/hirsen/britney_law/2008/02/11/71822.html


Not only are celebritie's privacy being totally invaded, but also normal everyday people like ourselves! On youtube's logo picture it states: "broadcast YOURSELF". That does not mean broadcast others without their permission but yet people still do it. They broadcast fights, humilliating scenes, and also videos making fun of others for everyone to see. People may laugh at it, but how might you feel if it was you being made fun of or beaten up and it was shown on the internet for all to see. What does youtube say they permit and do not permit on their site? Do they follow through with what their rules are ?
info about youtube and rules on site here --
http://uk.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines

PEEPING TOMS; SOMETHING TO CONSIDER!

*adding more about new technology that invades our own personal privacy (ex; people using cellphones to take 'up-skirt' pictures*



Discuss weather or not more action should be taken on invasion of privacy both for celebrities and ourselves. When is it acceptable to be shown to the public without permission, and when is it not acceptable? Think of; is it right to invade celebs privacy? Is it right to show people on youtube for a joke when they do not know? In which situations is it a positive thing to invade privacy, and in which situations is it negative to invade privacy?

other sites with important info;
this one is about how Princess Diana's death may have been connected to paparazzi following their car:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9708/31/diana.paparazzi/index.html
video of justin Timeberlake talking about Papparazzi:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOeuGY-WFKQ

Unflattering photo taken of Tyra Banks by the papparazzi:













Works cited;
“camera pic” Unknown date. Online image. photobucket. May 6/08.<http://photobucket.com/image/camera/ashleyxtastic/camera.jpg?o=13>

"Bald britney" Unknown date. Online image. photobucket. May 6/08. <http://photobucket.com/image/bald%20britney/Basch4tw/Britney-bald.jpg?o=5>

"Youtube" April 5/08. Online Image. photobucket. May 6/08. <http://photobucket.com/image/youtube/Nalcast/youtube.jpg?o=5>

Mary had a little --L.A.M.B?

Let's get this straight, yes--Gwen Stefani, a famous well known singer from America DOES have four girls who are called "The Harajuku Girls" follow her around constantly, she DID name them Love, Angel, Music, and Baby which happen to not be their real names, and she DOES in fact not let them speak in public. When first hearing these things you probably think "what the hell?That's not right at all..it's as if their just robots or something!" Well atleast that is what I thought when I first heard of it. After long thought, some research, and comments from other people whom I asked their opinion for, I have very much changed my mind on the situation. It is not so much a negative insult to the people of Japan that actually live and experience Harajuku life, but instead, shows a woman with a serious passion (maybe even obsession) for their culture. It is then argued that perhaps she is in it for the money and her obsession for this culture is just a big scandal. There are many people out there who are very interested in the Harajuku lifestyle but you do not see them making money off of it do you? They are just sincerely interested in it. Maybe Gwen is just as interested in it as these people. Who is anybody to judge her for being a greedy person who is only it for the money, when they do not actually know her personally? That would infact be an assumption about her, not a real fact.

It has been said that Gwen is perhaps showcasing these girls as something that is false. Some people believe that it makes every Harajuku girls look as if they follow around a blond 24/7 and are completely mindless. People are making a HUGE deal over Gwen somwhat falsely showing Harajuku culture. It's not as if Japanese culture hasn't mad a few mistakes on other culture before. For example on this site, http://www.engrish.com/faq.php#Q1 it shows many examples of mistakes that have been made about North American culture by Japanese culture.

Definition of Engrish:
Engrish can be simply defined as the humorous English mistakes that appear in Japanese advertising and product design.

So if people in general--no matter where they're from, make mistakes on a culture other than their own, it shows that atleast they are getting involved in that different culture and are attempting to learn things about it, even IF they do not fully get the concept. Gwen is doing exactly that. She is curious, and so adoring over the Harajuku lifestyle, that she is incorporating into her music and by doing so, it is being misinterpreted as being rude, racist, and ridiculous.

In Gwen's song "Harajuku girls" she basically sounds like she worships them and everything they do."Harajuku girls, you got the wicked style -- I like the way that you are -- I am your biggest fan, oh." I don't know about you, but that doesn't sound like she's putting them down or degrating them in any way. It sounds as if she just truly loves them a lot. If Gwen made a song about how horrible they are, then yes, that would be wrong, but what in the world is wrong with someone showing adoration about something they are passionate about?When did that become a crime? Is she not allowed to appreciate another culture?

So what about Love, Angel, Music, and Baby? Are they being severely hurt by all this? Absolutely not. They couldn't be happier. Money, Fame, Friendship, Dancing with Gwen Stefani --that just about sums it up. We don't see them walking away and being disgusted with all of this. They aren't often critisized about what they are portraying, only Gwen Stefani is being talked about for her being "racist".

Without Gwen having these four girls in our lifestyle, would anyone REALLY know what Harajuku lifestyle is? Would many people try and find out about it and be interested in it? Probably not. It is because of Gwen Stefani that we heard about them. It does not fully mean that we think all Harajuku people are just like Love, Angel, Music, and Baby but it gave us a taste of something new in this world that we could now perhaps find out more about. It was only a buliding block to learning about a new facinating, unique, culture which we would not have known anything about without Gwen introducing them, may it be a completly 100% true way of showing them or not.

Lol..there is a point to watching this video, takes a while to get to the specific part, but the Harajuku girls do actually talk in this video all together.

Woks Cited.
unknown. "Gwen Stefani and Harjuku girls"No date. Online image. photobucket images. 9 April 2008.
<http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi51.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff376%2Fbanana_lynn%2Fgwen.jpg&searchTerm=harajuku%20girls%20and%20gwen&pageOffset=1>

unknown. "Gwen Stefani"No date.Online image.photobucket images. 9 April 2008.
<http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi102.photobucket.com%2FHarajukuStefani.jpg&searchTerm=harajuku%20girls%20and%20gwen&pageOffset=4>

unknown. Tian's Blog. 25 Mar. 2008. 9 Apr. 2008.

Unknown, . Engrish. 2006. 9 Apr. 2008 . http://www.engrish.com/

unknown. "Gwen", No date.Online image.google images.9 April 2008.<http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/celebs/gwenstefani/gwen_stefani_12.jpg?

unknown. "wen Stefan" No date.Online image. google images.9 April 2008. >

unknown."gwen stafani said".youtube.April 9 2008.< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F45YADnlAA >

Computers,cellphones,televisions--this is the 21st century people!

List the names of your family members, and indicate which is their favourite media tool (hardware or software)

Me- computer

Mom- phone

Dad- television (movies)

Sister- computer

brother- television

Which is the least favourite? Why?

Me- The home phone is my least favourite because I have a cellphone and every one can contact me on that. I rarely need to use the home phone.

Mom- My mom's least favourite would be the television because she doesn't watch tv that often.

Dad- My dad's least favourite would be the computer. I think it's mainly because he does not have a clue how to use it.

Sister&brother- My sister and brother's least favourite would be cellphone's because they don't have one first of all and second of all they have no need for one.

Do children of different ages or sexes prefer different items? Why?

Yes, I do think that the age of a person changes the preference and amount of use of different items such as the tv, computer, etc. For example, My younger sister and brother would not have use to a cell phone at their ages. They also do not really need a computer because they do not have homework to do or msn when they are only in grade 2 and 3. The gender of a person might slightly determine what items they prefer more. A girl probably uses their cellphone a little more often then the guys do.

Which item is used the most? Why?

The item i would say that is used the most in my house is the computer. It is used everyday by either me or my mom so that we can check emails/i can do my homework etc. I usually have homework i have to type up everyday.

Which item is used the least? Why?

The home phone is used the least in my household because me and my mom both have cell phones and we usually tend to use those because on weekdays, we are not home until the evenings when we get home from school/work.

media here, media there, media everywhere. (72 hr survey)

Three Days Of Media

What I Did & the Media I experienced
day1;Thursday)Walked around halls of OP at lunch
listened to ipod with friend.
walked outside, saw Tim Horton’s cup on the ground.

Took city bus home from school
saw ads on the bus for RCMP, promoting the importance of school credits, and Nicole Sherzinger’s new songs.
Heard person next to me listening to rap.
Saw billboard for a new line of ski coats/skis/winter wear called ‘Gusti"

Went home
watched Tyra Banks
Saw preview for a new movie with Jack Black ‘Be Kind Rewind’
Went on computer to do homework. Pop up for a vacation.
Listened to music before bed

Day 2; Friday)Bus to school
Heard two people talking about something they saw in the newspaper about a ‘helmet law’
Two other people talking about how they want a new cell phone that came out.
Saw someone with an Abercrombie bag I liked.

At school
Read a magazine in class, saw celebrities promoting different products. (Example; Mary Kate and Ashley in the ‘drink milk’ ad)

Went to Friend’s House
Saw ad for pizza so we drove to get Pizza, listened to music on the way there.
Watched two movies; Step Up & No Reservations
Friend showed me a book she’s reading
Went on the computer and talked to people on msn.
Called people on my cell phone.

Went to the Mall and out.
Went into favourite clothing stores and saw pictures of people wearing the clothes and promoting them.
Went into Music World, saw all the new CD’s and movies
Saw Billboards outside the mall promoting all the stores in the mall.
Went to the tea hut- had a lot of magazines there all written in Chinese.

Went home
Put on much music before bed, saw Britney Spears ‘piece of me’ music video and Simple Plan’s ‘when I’m gone’ music video.

Day 3; Saturday) Dad picked me up to go to his house.
Heard radio on the way there. They talked about upcoming concerts and sports games coming up in Toronto (Example; the spice girls concert)
listened to CD

At Dad’s
Played Nintendo 64-Mario party with my dad.
Saw poster I put up in my room of the "what a girl wants" movie.
Saw cosmopolitan magazine on my table.
Had a lot of empty shopping bags in room (AE, Hollister, H&M)

Walked around with friend-went to store
On walk there, saw Tim Horton’s and Mcdonald’s bags/cups on ground.
In the store, saw movies for rent, magazines, new products.

Watched TV before bed
E talk Daily came on after a tv show I like. Talked about recent events in Hollywood and what celebrities will be wearing for red carpet night.


After completing three days of studying the media around me, I’ve noticed there is in fact media influences in everything you do and everywhere you go. Even simply walking down the street, you can be faced with media such as someone listening to music in their car. For me personally, I feel like there is a little bit too much media around us and it could be taken down a notch. It is annoying sometimes because the media is starting to become something many people talk about daily. Also, I don’t really care to hear about what celebrities are doing because it does not interest me. There are better things in life to talk about other than gossip about people we do not even know.